Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2019 23:23:41 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: python@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 231392] print/py-psautohint: Update to 1.9.1 Message-ID: <bug-231392-21822-lXTu8A5zOP@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-231392-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-231392-21822@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D231392 --- Comment #23 from Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Ting-Wei Lan from comment #21) Instead of -extras, I would prefer current naming which is clear enough. And what if other ports require different options? But I don't like the combination of options. It would be more flexible if a port enables only one option. Regarding the patch, it looks strange to me. Why not use OPTIONS_EXCLUDE ra= ther than redefining OPTIONS_DEFINE? What if we move the OPTIONS from Makefile to another file (e.g. options.mk). Let py-fonttools-foo include that file and add py-fonttools and foo_RUN_DEP= ENDS to RUN_DEPENDS. If a port requires fonttools[foo] and fonttools[bar], you c= ould add py-fonttools-foo and py-fonttools-bar to RUN_DEPENDS. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-231392-21822-lXTu8A5zOP>